Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jens Franzen

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) —Nnadigoodluck🇳🇬 09:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jens Franzen[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

~~Fails both WP:GNG and WP:NPROF. Created by editor who is disrupting Wikipedia to prove a WP:POINT Guy Macon (talk) 12:29, 4 August 2020 (UTC)~~[reply]

Based upon the arguments below I would like to withdraw this AfD. Is there something special I need to do or do we just wait for a closer? --Guy Macon (talk) 06:04, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Guy Macon (talk) 12:29, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Created at my suggestion as a longstanding red link at Darwinius. There's been a lot of interest in his work, for example [] have in the news, not without controversy. He won the first Friedrich von Alberti Award in 1998, and has written at least one book, though it got a rather dismissive review from National Geographic. His work was prominent, but so far I've not found personal details – is that a major issue? . . dave souza, talk 13:21, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am still looking for evidence that he meets the criteria of WP:NPROF. There is that Friedrich von Alberti Award.[1]. but NPROF specifies "The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level." Not sure that an award from 20 quarry companies qualifies as "a highly prestigious academic award". --Guy Macon (talk) 14:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Does the book meet the requirements of WP:NBOOK? If so, we could create a page for the book and redirect this page to it. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:35, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC source[2] and the Nature source[3] mention him in passing, and thus fail to meet the "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" criteria of WP:GNG. The National Geographic source[4] is about Franzen. Does WP:BIO1E apply? --Guy Macon (talk) 14:48, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep May have been created to hammer on a point, but believing that Franzen and Cédric d'Udekem d'Acoz fall into the same notability bracket rather demonstrates that the article creator lacks the discernment to assess notability as per WP:NPROF. Franzen isn't wildly notable, but he does meet our criteria. He has 18 years as department head at the Senckenberg Institute (we need a better article on that - de:Senckenberg Forschungsinstitut has all the goods). The Friedrich-von-Alberti-Preis may not be the Fields Medal, but it is a prestigious 10k Euro award. Among described species, Darwinius is a big deal in terms of primate systematics that got a lot of mainstream coverage (note the difference to "he described some species"). He has six taxa named in his honor (note the difference to "he named them himself"). This is an accomplished scientist with a lifelong body of work that makes him notable. - Sourcing could be better, but since this is a direct adaptation of the German article, inline cites are at a premium as usual. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If I see citations to reliable secondary sources establishing the above added to the article, I would be strongly inclined to withdraw this AfD. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:52, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are several high-calibre reviews of his last book (The Rise of Horses: 55 Million Years of Evolution): J Mam Evol, Quart R Biol, J Vert Pal. The bulk of his output seems to have been articles and chapters, not separate books. --Elmidae (talk · contribs)

Sourcing is the tricky bit here. My assessment of his scientific career suggests a WP:NPROF crit #1 pass here - this is alluded to in the book reviews. But the best source for this kind of overall judgement are usually obituaries, of which there are two:

Ottmar Kullmer, Stephan Schaal: In memoriam Jens Lorenz Franzen. In: Senckenberg Natur Forschung Museum. Band 149, Nr. 1-3, 2019, S. 42 [5].
Thorsten Wenzel: Der Herr der Urpferde. In: Senckenberg. Natur, Forschung, Museum. Band 147, Nr. 05/06 2017, S. 170–172 (just realized this can't be an obituary - pre-death :) Apparently an on-person piece then)

Unfortunately they have both been published in a jealously paywalled scientific society journal (of the kind that ain't popping up on SciHub) and it's unlikely that anyone here will get access to them. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:37, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Elmidae, I added a link in the article to the first obit you list above. (Well, to the entire journal issue, which the Senckenberg folks have on their webpage.) Russ Woodroofe (talk) 21:24, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nice, added it above. Well, they think he was a paleontologist of impact on his field, as do I, but then this is decidedly in-house. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 21:40, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The Paleontoligical Society (German: Palaontologische Gesellschaft) is a respected German learned institution affiliated with the International Paleontologocal Society, organising academic conferences, publishing an international journal (PalZ) and awarding the Friedrich von Alberti Award on behalf of the Alberti Foundation. Friedrich Lensing (talk) 16:13, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I don't see GNG being met here. WP:NPROF is somewhat plausible, but I have not yet seen a case for it. His citation record does not seem to suffice for C1, department head does not meet C6, and I'm not seeing the Alberti prize as meeting C2. Perhaps an argument can be made that his position met C5? WP:NAUTHOR is also plausible, if reviews can be found for his books. Russ Woodroofe (talk) 19:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep, in addition to the aforementioned was also major editor for The Early evolution of man, with special emphasis on southeast Asia and Africa, reviewed here, and 100 years of pithecanthropus; the homo erectus problem reviewed here, in addition to his Horse book being reviewed by Natgeo etc. PainProf (talk) 22:06, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
keep per Friedrich Lensing above based on lifes work, awards and achievements. --hroest 18:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. GNG is notthe relevant criterion; WP:PROF is, and it is completely independent, judging only on influence (and afew special cases). His very large amount of published work fully meets this. Watever the reason for creation, we judge the article, not the creator. If someone can find more notable paleontologists for us to include, so much the better. DGG ( talk ) 05:20, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.